Jin Wan

Background: PSMD1 has been considered to be involved in many human cancers, but its prognostic significance in gastric cancer (GC) has not been elucidated. The aim of this study was to evaluate the prognostic value of PSMD1 expression in tumor tissues of GC patients. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the expression of PSMD1 in 241 paraffin-embedded GC specimens of the training cohort by immunohistochemistry. The prognostic value of PSMD1 expression was assessed using Kaplan-Meier survival curves and multivariate COX regression models. PSMD1 expression and other GC-associated risk factors were used to generate two nomograms to evaluate prognosis, and the performance of the two nomograms was assessed with respect to its calibration, discrimination, and clinical usefulness. Further validation was performed using an independent cohort of 170 cases. Results: High PSMD1 expression was significantly associated with decreased disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) in GC patients. Furthermore, multivariate Cox proportional hazard analysis demonstrated that PSMD1 was an independent prognostic factor for DFS and OS. The two nomograms that were developed by integrating PSMD1 expression and the TNM staging system showed better prediction of DFS and OS than TNM staging system alone(C-index for training cohort: 0.708 (95% CI:0.670-0.746) and 0.712 (0.671-0.752), respectively; C-index for validation cohort: 0.704 (0.651-0.757) and 0.711 (0.656-0.767), respectively). Decision curve analysis demonstrated that the nomograms showed potential for clinical use. Conclusion: Intratumoral PSMD1 expression is a novel independent predictor of DFS and OS in GC patients. In the future, large-scale prospective studies will be necessary to confirm our findings regarding its potential prognostic and therapeutic value for GC patients.

Acute perforated gastric cancer (GC) is defined as an acute perforation of primary GC. It is a rare surgical acute abdominal disease that is mainly caused by advanced GC. The onset of acute perforation of GC is related to the depth of invasion. Preoperative diagnosis is very difficult for GC with acute perforation. The main method to confirm malignant perforation is intraoperative frozen section, which also is the primary clinical standard at present. The primary treatment for GC with acute perforation is surgical intervention, which is associated with high morbidity and mortality. Therefore, we should first consider short-term safety and choose the surgical approach based on the patient's condition, tumor stage and surgeon's experience. The physiological and operative severity score for the enumeration of mortality and morbidity (POSSUM) can provide a comprehensive assessment for patient's condition and surgical risk. Secondly, long-term survival should be considered and R0 resection is the most important. When R0 resection can not be achieved in the initial treatment phase, palliative gastrectomy should be avoided. A simple perforation repair can provide an opportunity for two-stage laparoscopic surgery, but the timing of the second stage operation is controversial. We advocate that advanced GC with acute perforation undergoing initial perforation repair can receive subsequent neoadjuvant therapy. A second stage surgery should depend on the response to therapy. Cases of acute perforation of gastric cancer are few. At present, high-level evidence is absent for surgical treatment at home and abroad, and there is no guideline or consensus for diagnosis and treatment. Therefore, it is necessary to explore and establish a comprehensive process of diagnosis and surgical treatment for acute perforated GC, which may be very helpful for first-line surgeons and can also improve the short-term outcomes and long-term survival for GC with acute perforation.

To explore the value of criminal fold priority separating (CFPS) in reduction of iatrogenic splenic injury in laparoscopic radical gastrectomy. Complete videos of 270 patients undergoing laparoscopic radical gastrectomy in Guangdong Provincial Hospital of Chinese Medicine were reviewed. Anatomic features of criminal fold (CF) were summarized. The relationship between CFPS and iatrogenic splenic injury was examined. CF was defined as the ligament between omentum and spleen. CFPS was defined as that CF was separated before the left half gastrocolic omentum was dissected. Splenic injury was further compared between CFPS group and non-CFPS group. CF occurred in 81.5% cases (220/270), presenting one bunch or multiple bunches. CF appeared most commonly in the lower pole of spleen (76.7%, 207/270), then in middle spleen (14.1%, 38/270) and upper pole (9.6%, 26/270). CFPS was performed in 20% cases (54/270) and 80% cases (216/270) were non-CFPS. The incidence of iatrogenic splenic injury was 11.1% (30/270), and this incidence of CFPS group was lower as compared to non-CFPS group (3.7%, 2/54 vs. 13.0%, 28/216), but the difference was not significant (P=0.07). Of 30 patients with splenic injury, 24(80%) were due to traction of CF and all were in non-CFPS group. Instrument injury occurred in 20% cases(6/30) and 2 were in CFPS group and 4 were in non-CFPS group. Most iatrogenic splenic injuries were successfully handled with electrocoagulation, adhesive and compression, except 2 patients underwent open splenectomy for serious splenic injury in non-CFPS group. In laparoscopic surgery for gastric cancer, iatrogenic splenic injury mostly results from improper traction of CF and CFPS can reduce the incidence of iatrogenic splenic injury.

Laparoscopic surgery for gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) is now widely performed. However, laparoscopic resection of GIST in the esophagogastric junction (EGJ) is technically difficult and rarely reported. Herein, we introduce four fashions of laparoscopic resection for EGJ-GIST.

Background: Currently, laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy is regarded as a safe and effective surgical approach for lesions in the body and tail of the pancreas. This review examined the evidence from published data of comparative studies of laparoscopic versus open distal pancreatectomy of nonductal adenocarcinomatous pancreatic tumor in pancreatic body and tail. Methods: A systematic review of the studies comparing laparoscopic and open distal pancreatectomy was conducted. Comparative studies published between January 1996 and June 2016 were included. Studies were selected on the basis of specific inclusion and exclusion criteria. These 2 techniques were compared regarding several outcomes of interest, which were divided into preoperative, operative, postoperative, and pathologic characteristics, postoperative biomarker, and hospital stay cost. Sensitivity and subgroup analysis partially confirmed the robustness of these data. Results: Ten comparative case-control studies involving 712 patients (53.7% laparoscopic and 46.3% open), who underwent a distal pancreatectomy were included. The results favored laparoscopy with regard to intraoperative blood loss (P=0.0001), the rate of blood transfusion (P=0.02), total hospital stay (P=0.004), postoperative hospital stay (PP=0.0002), the rate of wound infection (P=0.05), time to initial feeds (PP=0.008), duration of pain-killer intake (P=0.0003), and C-reactive protein on postoperative day 1 (P=P=0.02). Conclusions: Laparoscopic resection results in improved operative and postoperative outcomes compared with open surgery according to the results of the present meta-analysis. It may be a safe and feasible option for nonductal adenocarcinomatous pancreatic tumor patients in pancreatic body and tail. However, randomized controlled trials should be undertaken to confirm the relevance of these findings.

E22512 Background: Laparoscopic surgery for small (

E15071 Background: Laparoscopic splenic flexure mobilization was technically difficult for left colon cancer. This study was aimed to compare the safety and feasibility of laparoscopic radical left hemicolectomy using a bursa omentalis approach (BOA) versus medial-to-lateral approach (MtLA). Methods: BOA was entering the bursa omentalis prior to separating left Toldt’s fascia. We retrospectively analyzed data of 32 cases undergoing laparoscopic radical left hemicolectomy using BOA, matching with using MtLA from January 2013 and October 2016. The matching factors consisted of gender, age, ASA score, BMI, and TNM stage. Data of intraoperative and postoperative characteristics were reviewed. Splenic flexure mobilization time was defined as laparoscopic operation time minus left Toldt’s fascia separating time. Results: There was no significant difference in average time of ambulation, time to first flatus, hospital stay between two groups. The operative time was also similar between two groups (134.2±27.6 min vs 139.4±23.5 min. P = 0.42), but there are significantly shorter splenic flexure mobilization time in BOA group (25.9±12.3 min vs 35.5±22.5 min. P = 0.03). No entry to posterior pancreatic space was recorded in BOA group and 9.4% (3/32) were wrongly entering to posterior pancreatic space when separating left Toldt’s fascia in MtLA group. However, there was no significant difference in intra- or postoperative complication between groups. Conclusions: Our initial results suggest BOA for laparoscopic radical left hemicoletomy may be safe and feasible approach especially for unexperienced surgeons. The main advantages of present approach contain easy to identify pancreas and avoiding wrongly entering posterior pancreatic space when expanding the left Told’s fascia.

D2 lymphadenectomy is widely performed for advanced proximal gastric cancer, but complete dissection of No. 10 and 11 lymph nodes (LNs) is technically challenging, especially for those posterior to the splenic vessel. This study aimed to investigate the clinical significance of removing No. 10 and 11 LNs posterior to the splenic vessel in radical total gastrectomy. Between January 2013 and February 2015, 53 patients who underwent spleen-preserving D2 radical total gastrectomy were enrolled. While dissecting No. 10 and 11 LNs, we divided them into 2 parts, namely LNs anterosuperior and posterior to the splenic vessel, and the pathological data were reviewed. Sixteen patients underwent laparoscopy and 37 underwent laparotomy. No mortality was recorded. According to the pathological results, the TNM stages of the tumor were IIA in 11 patients (20.8%), IIB in 5 (9.4%), IIIA in 7 (13.2%), IIIB in 10 (18.9%), and IIIC in 20 (18.9%). The mean number of LNs retrieved was 30.3 ± 12.3. The sum of No. 10 and 11 LNs posterior to the splenic vessel was 59 and the mean number was 1.11 ± 1.47. One LN with metastasis was found in the special 59 regional LNs, and the metastasis rate was 1.9% (1/53). Concerning the low metastasis rate (1.9%) and difficult complete dissection of No. 10 and 11 LNs posterior to the splenic vessel, our initial analysis suggests that the rate of No. 10 and 11 LNs posterior to the splenic vessel metastasis was 1.9%, but further studies are needed to reveal its clinical significance in D2 radical total gastrectomy for advanced proximal gastric cancer.